https://matteocampagna.com/en/registry/equipment/composite-bow-versus-wooden-bow Changes to this claim in Matteo Campagna's evidence registry: its status, its year-by-year history, revisions of the page. en-gb https://matteocampagna.com/en/registry/equipment/composite-bow-versus-wooden-bowThere is only one direct measurement of the horn-and-sinew composite. In 1988 six replicas of historical bows were shot by the same archer at a ballistics station: a 27-kilo composite sends the 50-gram arrow off at the same speed as a 36-kilo yew longbow and throws it more than 90 metres further. In the same test a 17.2-kilo Apache wooden bow backed with sinew launches a 28-gram arrow at 43 metres per second, against 30 for the 24.9-kilo Sioux hickory bow with a 30-gram arrow. The models explain where the advantage would lie: at equal draw weight, draw length and limb mass, six types of bow, from the ancient straight bow to the modern recurve, launch the arrow at almost the same speed, but sinew and horn store 2,500 and 1,500 newton metres per kilo against 1,100 for yew and 700 for maple, so by the calculation the composite reaches the same draw weight with shorter, lighter limbs, and the credit goes to the materials, not the shape. In 2020 a comparison at equal draw weight and draw length points the same way, with the elm bow about 14% slower, but the other bow is a modern one, with a wooden core between two strips of fibreglass, not a horn-and-sinew composite. The test on the historical composite compares a single bow of each type, and bows that differ in several things at once.claim:arco-composito-vantaggio:revision:2026-08-08:3Sat, 08 Aug 2026 08:00:00 GMT https://matteocampagna.com/en/registry/equipment/composite-bow-versus-wooden-bowclaim:arco-composito-vantaggio:new_claim:2026-07-04:riportatoSat, 04 Jul 2026 08:00:00 GMT